About this Show

[untitled]

NETWORK

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 24 (225 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

San Francisco 32, California 6, Us 4, Fbi 3, Chan 2, Doj 1, Turman 1, Dave Hardy 1, Griffin 1, Da 1, United Kingdom 1, Alaskan 1, Pacific Islanders 1, Seattle Washington 1, Emailiate 1, The City 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    January 24, 2013
    11:00 - 11:30pm PST  

11:00pm
placed. we have made fewer arrests and i think that will continue to occur. again we are focusing our efforts on moving forward but if there is anything you would like me to address now i'm on the administration side of the police department please don't hesitant to let me know either face-to-face or by email you all have my email address. >> thank you chief. >> any questions for me? okay thank you. >> good evening director griffin. >> good evening commissioners. this is a follow up presentation to one that was made back in september of last year, and we talked at that time about arrest reporting in san francisco and specifically about ucr, race reporting and ethnicity reporting. the first two slides are from that presentation just as a refresher what we talked
11:01pm
about then and the remaining three are from this presentation. so going back what we talked about is why we were reporting the way we were reporting -- what race codes we were choosing and why, and what i wanted at that time is that we report crime by race according to the california department of justice, which is the middle box. the california department of justice requires that we report the races that you see there, and they define hispanic as an ethnicity, not a race. that's why you didn't see it as one of our race codes. you see it in order so the white house of management and budget has made a change to the race codes so they now include what you see there. white, black, american
11:02pm
indian, alaskan, and pacific islanders -- i don't know how they occur but that's what they are currently. california department of justice is still the same that you see. the fbi is the same as that. what we agreed in the last meeting is that in san francisco we would continue to report race and we are required to report according to the code but we also talked about beginning to use the 19 ethnicities that we have available to us in the sheriff's system. the sheriff had a system that provided 19 ethnicities. we plan to go to that system eventually. we're currently not on it. we do an arrest card and give it to the sheriff and the sheriff enters it for us so essentially we are
11:03pm
using their system. they produce the reports i'm going to show you. we worked closely with the sheriff to make this happen and we have the dual reporting report the codes and the ethnicities. as of october last we're we did it and we had to come back together because we were getting ones that said "not entered" and we took care of that so we are now getting pretty good statistics and that's what i am going to show you. so this is as i mentioned the bookings by race -- i should point out these are adult bookings and these are actually inclusive of both the sheriff, the police as well as 13 other agencies. lieutenant dave hardy, the sheriff is providing this to me and includes a number of smaller agency. the lion's
11:04pm
share are police, about 80% and 7% sheriff and 12% from smaller agencies and veteran's police, fbi, adult provision, da investigations, and a few others. questions about this slide? and then the bookings by ethnicity. questions now or no? >> go ahead. >> so i understand the difference between the slides the lasted slide is composite of all of the agencies -- >> these are composites of the same agency. they're redundant. kind of a different cut of the same pie. >> got it. thank you.
11:05pm
>> questions? >> so in essence in the 13.52 of hispanic come figured within the previous slide within whatever they self identify -- >> correct. >> okay. or refusal. okay. >> commissioner chan. >> thank you for your work and i know you are busy and there is updating with this and i appreciate your work on this and i wanted to know about the doj website and i look on it and california under hispanic seems
11:06pm
off compared to other counties. i am wondering with the changes you made will that be corrected for the period you corrected it from? so the end of 2012 or will it be corrected in 2013? just in comparison to other counties that is where i noticed a notice. >> so we have and will continue to report hispanic as a race correctly to the doj: the doj has their own reporting and they mix race and ethnicity in certain reports. those will continue to be the same as they are today for us, so in other words they have sort of this mix thing going on where they state these are the race codes. these are the ethnicity codes but they have a report where they mix the two codes together. we currently are still -- we're reporting these 19 ethnicities
11:07pm
locally in san francisco. we're not reporting them to the doj, so that was -- you know, we planned to do that at some point but we're not doing it yet. >> because they're not equipped to take it? >> well, truly this is a whole process. right now the arrest reporting process in san francisco has 11 different systems. it has seven different departments and it has about 14 different agencies so it's a very complex process, and it's not a simple matter. everyone is reporting something different so i can only talk about what we're reporting and currently our first step is we need to get on the same system as the sheriff and then we will report our race and ethnicity data directly to the doj. >> but this report is available for all of 2013 forever?
11:08pm
>> absolutely, yes. >> so if this commission ever wants this report it would be ready at request? >> thank you. that's help. . and what i am interested is see when the next set of data comes out from cal doj and how we compare and our hispanic numbers are proportional to others cities and seems like the numbers were low given our population. it was different in other counties. >> it will in this report but we can't control how they put it together. this report is available to anybody that ever wants it. it's just not -- as the director said it's not how the cal doj puts it together or whoever but we have it right now in san francisco, but whether
11:09pm
we get them to take what we have is a work in process. >>i am curious about it and whatever they're doing it should be consistent around counties and what i am confused about and a matter of talking so it's calculating accurately . >> still getting it white -- hispanic -- >> and this is like the jttf and folks want me to fix the fbi. i can only fix san francisco. san francisco is fixed. i can't fix cal doj. >> let me try to clarify and i will pass the mic. seems like our numbers for hispanic arrest numbers are low and not consistent with other counties and it's not just cal doj but how they're reporting san francisco numbers and it's not like every county has this problem and i think it will be
11:10pm
remedied in the future and how the numbers compare and does it make sense with the other counties? >> do all of the counties collect the dat at same way as san francisco? >> my guess is no. >> if you're going to comparein and i know some other county doesn't collect it like this. i mean you have different processes. i am talking about county by county comparison. i'm know not dealing with the feds and if everyone was using the same process. >> it emseemed like there were differences between the county scption how they collect data and with local pressures or whatnot but the cal department of justice has the expect 19 ethnicities that they do collect and the same ones in the sheriff's system and those are
11:11pm
the ones that we plan to use so we have between the three entities -- so it makes sense that the other counties in california anyway use the 19 ethnicities. whether they are or not i don't know. >> makes sense but we don't know. >> it would make sense. we don't know. >> okay. all right. >> and i know better to conclude from what the report coming out whether how they actually reported in. >> commissioner. >> so how did you manage this? this is really, really exceptional, and let me tell you to get officers i know i think the department is being modest here but to get officers to change the way they do the booking cards and self identify and the complication of the process. i am sure you're in the in fact process and you're going to tweak it and get better over time but the fact that we
11:12pm
can have accurate information as a policy body to take the temperature and see what is going on. i know there are concerns. i'm not sure about the other counties and i appreciate the chief's commitment to accurate data because if we don't have rackat data we're drawing incorrect conclusions and i can imagine how difficult it is to make change and get folks comfortable with it and i think it takes that commitment in the highest levels to do that and it's clear to me the fact that we can get monthly data on this in real time going forward. i know there are concerns about the data in the past, but it's really exceptional and i appreciate you had to dual track this and you still have to live in a world where the fbi requires certain data from cal doj and they require certain data from you, but it wasn't an excuse to take it to the next
11:13pm
level and do what this body asks and give us accurate data on folks so i'm sure going forward we will have questions and that is our job but i really wanted to say how exceptional i think this is in the beginning and looking forward and i appreciate the commitment to getting it right and it helps do our job. >> thank you commissioner. i really appreciate that. it was the chief and the people in the back of the room and i wanted to mention dennis hardy and providing the report on a monthly basis and do the work and to get the sheriff get their data and have them enter the information in a similar way that we were doing. >> thank you and i know it's been a long project and at least we're on track. thank you. >> thank you. >> and then finally commissioner chan asked if cjcj could present since we were talking about
11:14pm
arrest statistics. >> good good evening commissioners and thank you for the opportunity to present today. let me just get my notes. so i am selena [inaudible] and here representing the juvenile justice and nonprofit based in san francisco and provides services and technical assistance and policy data driven analysis. cjcj has been reporting on san francisco data for the past decade. we have issued multiple reports in 2004, 2005 and 2012 documenting a 40 year history of increasingly racially desperate arrest practices and the policies resulting in these trends. while african-americans make up 6% of san francisco's population they accounted for 54% of drug
11:15pm
sales and arrests and 40% of drug sales arrests in the city. that is african-americans were 18 times more likely to be arrested for dealing drugs and 10 times more likely to be arrested for possession of drugs than the city's other races combined. this large disparity is not explained by racial differences in drug use as estimated by drug deaths, so from 1995 to 2009, 62% of drug deaths were white non latinos and 22 were african-american and 10% latinos and asian islander so that disparity is unique to san francisco. our study showed prior to the 990's san francisco drug enforcement resembled state wide. after 1995 san francisco's rate of felony
11:16pm
arrest of african-americans increased dramatically and not occur elsewhere in the state and for other racial categories in san francisco. in 2009 data shows that african-americans in san francisco experienced felony drug arrests seven times higher than the rest of california. these trends are apparent in other areas but to varying degrees. we were unable to do more work on this due to the system. we are pleased that the system is being upgraded and for the police department to provide a available format with the corrected data with that being said as you saw in the slides of the previous presentation [inaudible] likely to increase the disparity regarding african-americans arrests rather than emailiate it and didn't have a significant impact on the respect. if there are
11:17pm
objective criminal justice goals and standards to justify the disparities that are unique to san francisco local authorities seem obligated to provide explanation. policies should have a public safety benefit for the residents and weighed against the harmful impact on the community. the policies create hardship on a group of san francisco society and so far there is no demonstration of the reasons for those policies or a demonstration of the public benefit. even accepting that these trends are reflective of actual drug crimes happen it seems misplaced. san francisco's real drug crisis is in drug abuse city wide, so the city's death toll from abusing illicit drugs far out weighs
11:18pm
every non natural death cause by wide margins and the worse epidemic and it's rising. from 2000 to 2009 drug abuse death rise in san francisco by 45% even as other forms declined yet the response has been a traditional strategy so arresting the same dealers in open air markets over and over again. the theory maybe based on cutting off the course but de facto drug use or considerations not far revealed. however in an era where a wide group deal drugs and arrest ones the strategy has become inefficient. law enforcement needs to be one component along with courts and treatment programs and reentry program in preventing drug
11:19pm
abuse and with crime and family break down. this is way from [inaudible] focusing on dealers. there are law enforcement alternatives for the sfpd to consider. i wanted to mention one and a pilot program in seattle washington that could be used as an alternative and small time drug dealers are deterred into community services rather than jail. the approach has been successful in the united kingdom. whether african-americans deal drugs at 18 times of the population or seven times the rate in other cities is maybe increasingly irrelevant. the gap of what race gets arrested from selling drugs and what race dies from using drugs is significant and requires a balanced approach
11:20pm
and the city needs to transition to policies reducing drug abuse. over the past decade san francisco law enforcement has prioritizing arresting drug dealers over consumers and focus on the drug dealing likely done by minorities. the choices have not searched san francisco well and especially the african-american population and the using population which is mostly white. we asked the police department to identify the success metrics which they base the success and we need a refined strategy in cooperation with other city programs that use limited arrest as one tool to address epidemic drug abuse. thank you. >> thank you. >> so is your point that the police department should not focus its efforts on arresting
11:21pm
those who sell drugs? >> my point would be that when the police department sets priorities, which of course it does with the resources that they do a data driven evaluation of the priorities and how effective they are in enforcing public safety so these policies are focusing on arresting dealers has never been demonstrated to have a public safety benefit so we are encouraging the police department to do an evaluation to show why they're in place. >> but you realize selling drugs is against the law, and the police department must enforce the law. if you want to change the priority you should be talking to the legislature, not to the police department. >> that's correct. drug dealing is illegal but so are other things and the police department doesn't enforce all of the laws
11:22pm
in an absolute way. correct. it makes priorities based on resources so for example in san francisco there has been a deprioritization of people using drugs or have small possession of drugs because it's not a good of police resources. >> and i am all for that we should not be a society that is arresting people because they "use drugs". it's an unfortunate situation but that should not be the driving focus, and the fact that african-americans -- if there is a disproportionate number of them as you say being arrested for selling drugs it's not because there are drugs. it's because of the lack of education, opportunity, jobs, housing, things that the african-american community has been deprived of which doesn't start with the police department, but starts at a much greater level than the police department, so you're talking
11:23pm
about -- you're talking to victims -- people who have to enforce. it's not our -- it's not our decision as to what laws are on the books but it's our decision about what we can do to put pressure on legislators and the people in -- that make the laws as to what kinds of opportunities that we can have for african-american communities. you know -- >> i absolutely agree and that's why i think we should really re-evaluate the policies because they have a harmful impact on the communities and achieve the goals we want to achieve. >> it's my community. i understand exactly what you're saying but i'm also not going to sit here and say that those who sell drugs -- and the sale of drugs is also -- it's not just
11:24pm
the harm upon the person who actually use drugs. usually -- not always but it also comes with a measure of violence as well. >> absolutely. >> which is destroying my community as well. >> absolutely. and maybe police officers should be focused on that reducing drug related violence opposed to drug dealing, but an evaluation would demonstrate maybe that there is absolutely a justification and a real causal connection with arresting drug dealers and reducing drug related violence or reducing drus use which is the harmful cause as you mentioned to the community, so i am suggesting since the disparities exist and they're stark in san francisco it's worth creating an evaluation to really look at the policies to make sure they're as effective as we want them to be. >> chief, sir. your data stops at 2009. >> yes.
11:25pm
>> so it is 2013. >> yes. >> i don't want anybody in this room to leave or on television to leave -- you said several times "current trends". what if i told you in 2012 arrests were down 45% of juveniles in san from where they did your sale. >> juvenile drug -- >> in general. the guidance center is at a all time low. the model you speak of is the restorative justice model. the alternatives to incarceration with emphasis with juveniles is the law of the land in san francisco. when this study was done i wasn't in the police department. i was in homeland security. i can tell you the current trend and 2,000 juveniles arrested and for this year -- maybe my chart doesn't
11:26pm
go back enough. we were under 2,000 physical arrests of juveniles and in favors of alternatives to incarceration. this is the model we used. i was at bay view and this is exactly what we did and achieved reduction in homicides and the emphasis wasn't on narcotics and incarceration and as thorough the study is there is someone wiser that says bad data gives you bad information. in that time we adding mit our data is mad. our data is much bmplt i invite you to do a survey work with the youth guidance center and the probation department to come up with a new survey to suggest how far we have come rather than suggest that you did very well and passionately that we're in the middle of a current trend that actually ended what is now four years ago. >> right absolutely so let me
11:27pm
be clear we are using data from 2009 because that was the most recent data publicly accessible to us. 2010 there was a severe glitch in the classification data system with the police department and we weren't able to use that data and of course now that you upgraded our ssz this is the poverty opportunity to do a new evaluation how far we have come and whether the racial disparities still exist or not and how effective we have been and absolutely that's what we are recommending and i would love access to that data to do that analysis. >> we are happy to work with you. >> great. >> commissioner. >> yes. i just had one question and i want -- since you're doing this going forward because going forward is what i am interested in. the question i have is when you do your proportionsate analysis and you say there are 7% african-american residents
11:28pm
in san francisco and a certain percentage of arrest rates are you used data of who is arrested based on who is a resident of san francisco? do you have access to that data? >> the arrest data includes san francisco residents and people coming into san francisco and arrested while in san francisco. >> okay. so it includes people who are not residents so the proportionsate rates are include people not living in san francisco the surrounding county. you might want to look at that. >> if the data is available we would. >> seems like there are thoughts on that. we are interested in data driven policy but it has to be accurate doe i think that a carve out that will make a difference. >> i will add as a former officer working drug cases arrests happened in the tenderloin and the bart crowd
11:29pm
and thought there was lenientacy there and it was an open market and not controlled by a gang. gang controls areas but not the tenderloin and look at those statistics so they're accurate. i don't mean to interrupt but i was a drug prosecutor for a good portion of my clear all the way to the federal level. like commissioner turman we were attorneys and i looked at it from top to bottom and when you do a wire tap you hit pay dirt when you need the interpreter and most of the drugs are from overseas and you see the trickle down and there is a correlation between drug dealing and violence. that is based on being a state prosecutor. there is a statistic i would like to